search_economic_indicators

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Description discloses key behavioral traits: it is free, requires no API key, searches many named sources, and returns specific metadata fields per match. It also notes that the full record requires purchasing via get_record. Given no annotations exist, this provides substantial transparency beyond the bare operation, though it doesn't mention rate limits or error handling.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is moderately long but each sentence provides useful information: access, purpose, sources, return fields, and usage context. The Args section is clearly separated, but the 'FREE' note could be positioned later to front-load the core function.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has a single simple parameter and no output schema, the description covers the return values explicitly and explains how to follow up with get_record. It also lists the broad scope of sources, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter, query, is described as 'keyword(s) to search', which is minimal but the main description clarifies that it relates to economic measures. With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates with some context but lacks examples or query formatting guidance.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: it answers what the official series for an economic measure is and where it comes from. It lists multiple authoritative data sources and specifies the return fields, distinguishing it from sibling search tools for other domains.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides context for when to use: macro research, model inputs, and grounding answers in citable official series. It also directs users to call get_record with a record_id for the full series, indicating an alternative/follow-up tool. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool versus other search tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.